Matthew 7:21-23

Originally posted by RJHinds
You are the one that waffles on and on and when you can't you get amnesia.

unworthy of serious comment

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
Dont you get taught how to deliver public talks in your church?

"deliver public talks"

Don't you mean "selling" your version of Christianity, based on half-truths, to an unsuspecting public, like a used-car salesman?

Originally posted by divegeester
Possibly, but I would wager no one knows because who can be bothered to read his monoglue posts.

At least he doesn't bore us to tears with post after post after post of a single question repeated ad nauseum. It doesn't work when your mentor FMF does it, either. That is how good threads get reduced to crap repetitive arguments for dozens of pages at a time.

Originally posted by sonship
The referred to post had three major points as targets.
While they were wordy perhaps, all three targets were hit.

1.) Anything more than God's Wisdom is [b]less likely to have been created rather than more likely. This is makes it more likely that He possessed that attribute rather than created it.

2.) Paul tells us the becau ...[text shortened]... Last" that created a secondary "the First and the Last".

Three bull's eye hits.[/b]

Personally I still have no idea why you think you hit anything, nothing in your text makes the least sense, a summation of your posts may be summed up by the following,

1. a nonsensical statement of complete waffle that makes no sense in direct contrast to the clear and concise statement that i gave regarding proverbs chapter eight and its reference to Christ.

2. a typical and rather insipid attempt to argue away the Bibles clear and unambiguous text, that Christ is of the creation, that is a part of the creation . Attempts to negate this away with impositions on scripture and references to his pre-eminence are extra Biblical (as is your pagan trinity doctrine) and cannot negate the fact, the Bible states clearly that he is part of the creation and was the first entity directly created by God. This is understood in the term, only begotten son, because we know that God had other sons, but Christ was the only begotten or the only one directly created by God in his pre-human existence. this is clear, concise and can be established Biblically with no need for waffle or deceit.

3. No one has claimed there is a primary or secondary first or last, once again you are waffling and making no sense.

Your references to hitting targets and bullseye are simply cheap trash talk and emphasise the weakness rather than the strength of your arguments.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
Perrsonaly I still have no idea why youthink you hit anything, nothing in your text makes the least sense, a summation of your poits may besummed up by thefollowing,

1. a nonsensical statement of complete waffle that makes no sense in direct contrast to the clear and concise statemt that i gave regarding proverbs chapter eight and its reference t ...[text shortened]... e simply cheap trash talk and emphasise the weakness rather than the strength of your arguments.

Have you managed to find where Jesus claims to be the archangel Michael yet?

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
Perrsonaly I still have no idea why youthink you hit anything, nothing in your text makes the least sense, a summation of your poits may besummed up by thefollowing,

1. a nonsensical statement of complete waffle that makes no sense in direct contrast to the clear and concise statemt that i gave regarding proverbs chapter eight and its reference t ...[text shortened]... e simply cheap trash talk and emphasise the weakness rather than the strength of your arguments.

Waffle away, Mr. Waffle.

Now I know why you never admit when you've been schooled.

You're too stupid to know when you've been schooled.

Originally posted by Suzianne
At least he doesn't bore us to tears with post after post after post of a single question repeated ad nauseum. It doesn't work when your mentor FMF does it, either. That is how good threads get reduced to crap repetitive arguments for dozens of pages at a time.

Sometimes I will repeat a question if it is being deliberately avoided by the respondent. Perhaps you should consider contributing more yourself Suzianne, instead of rocking up every couple of days, thumbing down every post of the people you don't like, then belly-flopping into some threads and attacking people.

Originally posted by Suzianne
"deliver public talks"

Don't you mean "selling" your version of Christianity, based on half-truths, to an unsuspecting public, like a used-car salesman?

oh dear more cheap trash talk that I generally would not give the time of day but seeing that its you fairycakes, ill do the honour of setting you straight. You do of course know that Timothy was counselled to give himself to improving his public speaking? to teaching the congregation?

New Living Translation
Until I get there, focus on reading the Scriptures to the church, encouraging the believers, and teaching them. 1 Timothy 4:13

Now as you can see even though members of the public may have been invited (alternative translation state public speaking) it was directed mainly to persons who were already members of the congregation. In view of this all congregations of Jehovahs witnesses teach its members how to deliver public talks, both men and women for all should be teachers.

This leaves your assertions of selling 'our version', looking like the cheap trash talk that it evidently purports to be and you have done yourself no favours by including it.

Originally posted by Suzianne
Waffle away, Mr. Waffle.

Now I know why you never admit when you've been schooled.

You're too stupid to know when you've been schooled.

LOL its like a cheap trash talk car boot sale at the local church . . . Me? I'm just waiting for suzzianne to show up with some fairy cakes and all will be well 😀

Originally posted by Suzianne
That is how good threads get reduced to crap repetitive arguments for dozens of pages at a time.

My observation is that your "crap repetitive arguments" simply do not withstand sustained, point blank, on-topic questions, and you've allowed this to turn you into little more than a fist swinging purveyor of ad hominems for too many of your posts.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie

New Living Translation
Until I get there, focus on reading the Scriptures to the church, encouraging the believers, and teaching them. 1 Timothy 4:13

That is probably a looser paraphrase version.
Ekklesia does not appear in the Greek of the passage.

A better translation:

Until I come, attend to the public reading, tp the exhortation, to the teaching. (1 Tim. 4:13 Recovery Version)

Other English versions -

English Standard Version
Until I come, devote yourself to the public reading of Scripture, to exhortation, to teaching.

New American Standard Bible
Until I come, give attention to the public reading of Scripture, to exhortation and teaching.

King James Bible
Till I come, give attendance to reading, to exhortation, to doctrine.

Holman Christian Standard Bible
Until I come, give your attention to public reading, exhortation, and teaching.

International Standard Version
Until I arrive, give your full concentration to the public reading of Scripture, to exhorting, and to teaching.

NET Bible
Until I come, give attention to the public reading of scripture, to exhortation, to teaching.

Only the paraphrased New Living Translation do I see deciding that what must have been meant was "church".

Originally posted by sonship

New Living Translation
Until I get there, focus on reading the Scriptures to the church, encouraging the believers, and teaching them. 1 Timothy 4:13

That is probably a looser paraphrase version.
Ekklesia does not appear in the Greek of the passage.

A better translation:

[quote] [b]Until I come, attend to the public reading, tp ...[text shortened]... ed [b]New Living Translation do I see deciding that what must have been meant was "church".[/b]

the context demonstrates that it was made with reference first and foremost to believers,

Keep on giving these commands and teaching them. Never let anyone look down on your youth. Instead, become an example to the faithful ones in speaking, in conduct, in love, in faith, in chasteness. Until I come, continue applying yourself to public reading, to exhortation, to teaching.

Who is it that Timothy is meant to be exhorting and teaching? members of the congregation. How is he meant to do this, through public speaking and teaching and by his example.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie

the context demonstrates that it was made with reference first and foremost to believers,

The word church (ekklesia) is not there. You're suppose to be a Greek translation stickler. Or is that just to argue that the Word was [a god] ?

Public reading is public reading.
Church is church.

What was actually written there?

In the Jewish culture they probably had public readings of the only Scripture known to them then - the Hebrew Bible.

This may have occurred in synagogues.

I looked it up in my Greek text edited by world renown Greek translator Dr. Bruce Metzger and ekklesia is not there. If you want to advertize yourself here as a Greek expert then do so accross the board and not just when it suits JW dubious renderings about the Logos was a god.

Originally posted by sonship

the context demonstrates that it was made with reference first and foremost to believers,

The word church (ekklesia) is not there. You're suppose to be a Greek translation stickler. Or is that just to argue that the Word was [a god] ?

Public reading is public reading.
Church is church.

What was actually written there?

In ...[text shortened]... so accross the board and not just when it suits JW dubious renderings about the Logos was a god.

I have not said that the term is there, you are simply therefore creating a straw man argument, what I have actually said is that is implied from the context which makes it clear that Timothy was to encourage and exhort the brothers and sisters in the congregation by example, teaching and public reading of Gods word. Why this should be difficult for you to grasp I have no idea. Indeed the ludicrous nature of your objection comes to the fore when we consider just how he was meant to do this by privately (as opposed to publically) reading the Bible.

Now we will examine the time very much following the judgment described in Matthew 7:21,23.

Some Christians workers have been dismissed.
Jesus has said "I never knew you" meaning He never approved of their methods or acknowledge them.

He doesn't deny that they did these things in His name. He calls them lawless works. "Depart from Me, you workers of lawlessness."

Whether this departing is temporary or eternal I set aside for the moment. What happens after this with the ones who have called "Lord, Lord to be saved (Romans 10:9)

Here is what follow the judgment seat of Christ for believers:

" And I heard as it were the voice of a great multitude and like the sound of mighty thunders, saying, Hallelujah! For the Lord our God the Almighty reigns.

Let us rejoice and exult, and let us give the glory to Him, for the marriage of the Lamb has come, and His wife has made herself ready.

And it was given to her that she should be clothed in fine linen, bright and clean; for the fine linen is the righteousnesses [sic] of the saints.

And he said to me, Write, Blessed are they who are called to the marriage dinner of the Lamb. And he said to me, These are the true words of God." (Revelation 19:6-9)

The plural RIGHEOUSNESSES [sic] of the saints is not a gramatical error. It is sometimes translated "righteous deeds". The wedding garment of the Bride is the righteousnesses of the saints. This is not the positional righteous standing of those justified by faith. Rather this is the righteous living in righteous deeds, ie. "the righteousnesses" which qualify the overcoming believers to participate in this special celebration.

We will go on to see that this Bride is also Christ's fighting army to accompany Him in His descent to take over the earth. Amen.